Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42433861›Full record

ArticleAnnals of medicine and surgery (2012)2026

Viewpoint: are surgeon-scientists still worth the investment?

Husain Shakil, Michael G Fehlings, Donald A Redelmeier

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of medicine and surgery (2012), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Husain ShakilDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Michael G FehlingsDivision of Neurosurgery, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Donald A RedelmeierDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4147-3544

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Surgeon-scientists bridge the gap between clinical care and medical discovery. Despite mounting economic and institutional pressures, their contributions can enhance patient outcomes, foster innovation, drive policy, and encourage philanthropy. This perspective highlights 10 enduring reasons to prioritize surgeon-scientists, underscoring their importance in advancing surgical practice, inspiring future leaders, and sustaining academic progress.

Indexed as

academic surgerycareer developmenthealth policysurgeon-scientisttranslational research

Identifiers

PMID42433861
PMCPMC13354406

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.